It was someone else that suggested it going to new accounts not me and I agreed momentarily but then said maybe it won’t work though as everyone will just start loads of new accounts etc
I think if it was actually my choice I would have it as more of a fund to help people who are putting time into either promoting blurt, people who do meetups, people who make engaging posts but that probably takes time and someone to manage so maybe everyone should just get a tiny percentage. I like fairness. I don’t like to see one person spamming the same message every day and getting the highest vote I’ve seen from it every day no.
Personally I don’t always have time to go searching for smaller content especially as my vote is 3 c so makes zero difference to them anyways, I would do it more if it was like a dollar or something, but when I have days with more time I defo do go and look for it a bit, it is easy to get in a rut with going down your own feed tho or the top of trending for sure. But a bot for the platform is supposed to be a bit more fair, I see that more like a government fund, that is supposed to have everyone’s needs in mind.
There is no discussion with opidia she came along and commented on my post so she opened up engagement. I don’t agree with how she uses the platform and she already knows this. She’s not going to change nor does she have to cause she’s free to use it how she wants. She has the right to spam the same post every day and self upvote and I get the right to say I think that’s the lowest use of the platform and others can disagree with me and say she’s adding value by adding money. Everyone has free right to have their own thoughts. But I definitely do not believe she should be getting higher bot payouts than people really spending time here or people who need it more. Either or. I would rather the witnesses get even who are putting time in and don’t get much £ for it atm. Or give it to developers.
I did wrongly assume she might have been involved in programming it cause she seemed to get such high votes and the people she doesn’t like got none lol but I think it might have been coincidence I’ll admit when I am wrong.
...That's why others should "be a bit fairer" than you are? Because you "don't have time" and because your vote "isn't worth anything"? That is shallow and shows how little you really care about the "little ones" and "newbies" and "disadvantaged". If you cared, the value of your upvote would not be a reason to abstain.
You don't seem to be able to use your high profile status to support all these underpaid bloggers by actively re-blogging them, making engaging comments in a positive way to motivate all these here. You throw around assumptions and then when they turn out to be wrong, you just laugh? And just jump away with a light heart? Hahaha? I come to the conclusion that for the moment there is no point in talking to you further about this issue.
I tell you that this attitude of "Oh darling, I didn't mean it that way and in reality it's not as serious as it might sound" is not a good idea.
I never profess to be some kind of blurt hero lol but I have definitely gone out of my way to support accounts I think are undervalued or new many times. I sometimes have more time than others right now I’m running Market’s so I tend to just drop on post upvOte a couple of things not to waste my vote and drop out. On periods when I have more time I put more effort in as I’m sure @world-travel-pro and @outofthematrix can attest to. I never pretend to be a charity worker but I do what I feel drawn to do.
I never really said I go around suporting newbies. I literally just agreed with a guy that it would be fairer than giving high votes to someone spamming the same post every single day. I never really have pretended to be someone who personally feels it is their mission to upvote small reward content with 3 c. Please show me where I’ve said this and I’ll appologise for saying something incorrectly as I’ve never felt it’s my thing. I have rly highlighted peoples posts though. I’ve made about 5 posts for @hangin trying to alert people to his posts cause I think they are amazing and under rewarded. I’ve not only reshared tons I’ve made posts and tagged in bigger accounts who have gone and supported him. If I help anyone it’s in that way rather than spending hours looking for new accounts and giving them about 2 pence which even in the poorest countries makes absolutely no difference. If I want to help an account that I think deserves it the best I can do is try and draw attention to it. I’ve done it with several accounts now over time when I have a bit more time on my hands. I’ve actually done this several times and reshared quite a lot of work from people I think are undervalued and even spent hours of my time organising a local blurt meetup and a quiz where I gave people prizes out of my own pocket.
I mean that is my personality I’m just a bit firey in a debate and don’t mind people that do it back. But I do stay on topic and after the debate can be back to total normal with the person, no grudges unless I generally don’t connect to them at all over a longer period of time. If I’m wrong I’ll just admit it like I did laugh and move on cause what the hell is the point of holding onto it? What would you rather I did deny it if I realise I’m wrong? Cry and beg for forgiveness. We are human, sometimes we are wrong and I think it’s best just to admit it and laugh and move on. Life’s too short. If you want to handle things different feel free to not engage. You come to my posts and comments a lot to engage, it’s optional.
Whether you would rather someone else (not you) get rewarded for their efforts or not is not your business after all, it is the business of those who feel underpaid or under-rewarded. If they want more, then they go to those who can give them more and offer themselves, make suggestions or do it indirectly by simply posting their content. Both is possible. But the reverse is true: "Standing up for others" is only possible if you select those who, in your eyes, deliver good content or do their work in the backends and frontends and you trust them and support them by vote. But you don't actively support anyone when you express an opinion, when you speak out against so-called content that you consider to be spam, because that makes you look envious. It seems to go against the grain for you, so create a police force here, like they did on Hive, to punish and downvote spam content and ask the big guys (founders or whales) to fund you because you have work to do tracking down and calling attention to such spam content or advocate for the introduction of a downvote button. That's how it was designed there "against each other". You noticed that and left. Maybe you wouldn't find it as bad as you always say? Maybe you were just pissed off not to be on the wanted side of things that time, but on the unwanted side?
You said in our past conversations you don't mind majority voting, so try to get a majority here to stop so-called spammers getting upvotes from the community (big and small voters). Have fun with this task.
I would like to state one thing about this topic: You can't agree on quality. It is impossible. Can you accept that or not? If you continue to think there is something like a consensus on the quality of individual blog posts, you won't be happy anywhere, neither on Steemit, nor Hive, nor here. Some people like the easy consumption of meme-postings, I personally know one on hive (antisocialist) who also does it on regular basis. I befriended myself with him and I found his memes quite votable (when I was still active there and remembered visiting his blog).
It is my business lol we can have an opinion on anything we want. The point of freedom of speech is that I am free to say it but no one has to listen.
I completely stand by my opinion that I think opidia does not deserve a high blurt bot upvote for sharing the exact same post every single day. I think if it was someone else like @LucyLin they would probably be on some spam list by now tbh for doing that. There is one thing a friend of hers upvoting cause they have an arrangement but the blurt booster is kind of like a government payout I guess. It’s sort of a basic income so then it becomes more important it’s fair than for who you or I vote for. ‘IMO’ which I am allowed to have an opinion and you are allowed to disagree.
You are not listening, are you? Others have already told you that this bot is not what you are "guessing". If guessing is the best you can do, I cannot take it seriously.
And if you're still "guessing" while you were told that this bot is an automatic program with certain parameters while nobody named it as "a kind of government payout" or some sort of "basic income" (otherwise show me where it is pinned on that it is what you "guess"). If you distrust the given statement from the initiators of the bot then go to them.
Find the responsible person and say that you want it to "be fair" and that this person shall work by your definitions and likes of fairness. Maybe, if you are annoying or charming enough, you'll finally get your will.
But I am beyond arguing with you what is fair or unfair, for I don't find that you argue well. While you are excellent with gossip.
This
I think practical thought is still upset because he thought I called him a liar when I said let’s not lie though. I’m still hoping at some point he might realise when he hears someone else use it as a turn of phrase or something.
I’m not arguing I’m simply debating and happy to stop right now. Perhaps you could stop replying and then it would all just end and you wouldn’t have to you debate with me anymore.
while I stopped arguing (in the meaning of real arguments/points of debate) I will not stop answering your comments. End when you will, I will end when I will.
Quality is one thing, but this bot claims to actually be votIng on quality lol yet it’s somehow giving someone one of the highest rewards for just posting the same thing every day. If it was a different post and I just didn’t like it every day, no issue.... but to keep sharing the exact same thing every day isn’t about personal taste it’s clearly spam.
I don’t mind majority voting but to get an idea of what a majority is you need to express an opinion lol. If every single person disagrees with me and thinks someone posting the exact same post ever single day deserves the highest blurt booster payout then I’ll disagree but accept that reality cause most people think it’s fair. Right now I don’t know what everyone thinks. Do you? What makes you think your in a majority?
Tbh I have scrolled all through the comments here and I think the majority don’t think blurtbooster is currently fair. So being in the minority are you happy to just support the push to change the algorithms?
Nothing. You made yourself thinking that I thought of myself being in a majority.
I don't care if there is a minority or a majority on blurt booster votes, because I do not like to envy other peoples payouts and IF I do, I would be too embarrassed to tell anybody and keep it to myself. If I have nasty feelings about what payouts I see at other blog posts, I ask myself if I was treated badly or if I must feel sorry for myself for not getting enough. My answer usually is no and if I feel pity for me I stay quiet until the pity is over.
I never mentioned majority it was you that said that I liked majority voting and I simply told you that I think the majority on this post is that they don’t like somebody who spams the same post every day, getting the higher blurt booster votes. I’m not sure why you think I would be jealous because I get far higher votes and she does anyway and even a full vote is not even a cappuccino here, maybe if blurt was a dollar LOL. But even then I said I’m happy not to even get it myself because I don’t care so how does that make me jealous?
Now you don't know your own words from right above(?), which I made easy because I quoted you.
I will give you another list of your own words soon. Adding the last sentence of yours to make it complete.
Okay, to make a long story short: If you're going to count (majorities), count me as a dissenting vote, because I don't agree with you, not because I'm so passionate about said blog, but because I don't like your repetitions and nagging in this regard.
Beyond that, I abstain from further debate for the moment.
Sure I already counted you as pro opidia getting the high blurt booster for the same daily posts but I still decided the majority thought it to be unfair I’m afraid upon a brief analysis.